
When India was turned into a vast prison house
For me, the horror of all the horrors of the Emergency was that India had become a vast prison house. Fear gripped the political class, the intelligentsia, the business community, and the media. During the Emergency, it has been estimated that 34,988 people were arrested under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act and 75,818 people were arrested under the Defence of India Act and Rules.
As a 30-year-old junior officer in the Tamil Nadu cadre of the IAS, I felt like I was suddenly imprisoned myself, unable to speak my mind without looking over my shoulders, for walls had overnight acquired ears, corridors eyes. Newspapers were under the strictest censorship, and the radio relayed only government-sponsored news.
Word came through, nonetheless, of Jayaprakash Narayan, the country's tallest leader, having been woken up at three in the morning and taken to jail, and his saying, as he was being moved, vinasha kaale vipareeta buddhi (as perdition nears, the ruler loses his mind). National leaders like Morarji Desai, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, LK Advani, Charan Singh, Chandra Shekhar, were all taken in. As were student leaders including Prakash Karat and Sitaram Yechury of the CPM, and Arun Jaitley of the BJP. George Fernandes was captured after some months of being underground. His supporter Snehalatha Reddy was thrown into prison, tortured and died shortly after, while on parole. P Rajan, a student at the Regional Engineering College, Calicut, was arrested by the police in Kerala on March 1, 1976. He was tortured to death in custody. His body was never found.
This sequence, transposed over what I had learnt of jailings during the British Raj, made the prison the ugliest symbol of the State for me. It also made the prison something I wanted to see and get to know in the course of my work as a civil servant. Had I become a district collector that chance would have come to me organically. But as it happened, that coveted position eluded me in my career in the IAS. I came to see the inside of a jail only years later when, working in West Bengal, I did what Prime Minister Manmohan Singh asked all governors to do. I visited correctional homes, as jails were by then called.
In one, a bearded young man came up to me and said in Hindustani: 'Huzoor, I am a Pakistani. I wanted to visit Ajmer Sharif for a minnat (vow). I got a visa and came. But my mistake was I came alone. I was detained on the suspicion of being a terrorist. I want to make no request or complaint to you. I only want to thank you. By arresting me and putting me in this jail, India has done me a favour. I have found a copy of the Holy Quran in the library here and have read it for the first time from beginning to end…' I did not know what to say to him. Was he being ironic, sarcastic, genuinely appreciative? In any case, he was being totally intellectual.
In another correctional home, as I was leaving, completely torn by the spectacle of elderly women sentenced for dowry killings, and by a section cruelly called pagal ward (ward of the mad), I was accosted by a young Bengali inmate. 'Saer,' he said breathlessly, in Bangla, 'Our library here… it needs a regular supply of good new books.' He could have been a final year student in any of our universities.
In yet another, the inmates made a plain request: 'Can we have, just for the day, Sir, a TV installed to enable us to watch the Wimbledon Open?' This was done, to the great delight of the set there that might have included murderers, rapists, thieves. But all of them were for that day, tennis fans no different from other free followers of Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer. We who are 'out' do not know the story of those who are 'in'.
India is under no Emergency today. But is the horror of Emergency horrors, the jail, call it by whatever name, not a grim reality? Are there no political detenus in India today? Is the threat of imprisonment not active in our political economy? The 50th anniversary of the promulgation of the Emergency should respect history, not serve politics.
The Congress has a truly golden opportunity to offer an unequivocal and unstinting apology for each and every transgression committed in the course of that Emergency, across the gamut of human rights, political norms, legal nostrums. Would it be too much to expect the Congress president to call on arguably the seniormost living ex-prisoner of the Emergency era, Advaniji and offer him a personal apology? He should do this not as the president of the party that was in power during the Emergency, but the party that led India to freedom. And the government has a golden opportunity to do something beyond recalling the Emergency's horrors.
What may that be?
It can announce a chapter-turn in India's penological history by releasing all so-called political detenus, and by saying detaining persons for their political views, when not accompanied by incitement to violence, or hatred, will henceforth not happen. More, it can alter for all time, our prison profile, turning our jails into serious centres for state-of-the-art correctional services across physical and mental counselling, personality therapy, re-orientation, where there is no question of custodial torture, where prisoner-on-prisoner violence and perversions are erased, where in-jail crimes with outside collaboration, especially in drugs-abuse, are a thing of the past. Above all, it can put life into the amendment of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) which by, Section 436A (new Section 479 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita) allowing for the release of undertrial prisoners on bail after they have served half of the maximum sentence prescribed for their alleged offence, provided it is not a capital offence (punishable by death or life imprisonment). Seventy-five percent of the inmates of our scandalously overcrowded correctional homes are undertrials, most of whom are very likely innocent.
The practice of releasing prisoners at anniversaries is an old and respected tradition across the world. The government of India will show by tangible deed its abhorrence of the imprisoning spree that marked the Emergency if it startles the nation by this radical reform.
Gopalkrishna Gandhi is a student of modern Indian history and the author of The Undying Light: A Personal History of Independent India. The views expressed are personal.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Delayed appointments challenge judiciary's independence: SC ex-judge
Porvorim: Lawyers recommended for judgeship have to wait for around a year for govt to approve their appointment. This is an example of the independence of the judiciary still being challenged today, a retired judge of the Supreme Court , Justice Abhay S Oka, said on Thursday. He said that former Chief Justice of India, Sanjiv Khanna, made the entire system transparent by putting in the public domain every single document on how the collegium functions. All documents at every stage, right from the recommendation from the collegium of the high courts, the state, and authorities, to any objection raised by the chief minister, the governor, or the intelligence bureau, as well as the response of Govt of India, are all public, Oka said. 'All this comes before the Supreme Court collegium, but today we have scenarios where, after the Supreme Court collegium approves the recommendation and it is put out on the website, it takes nine months and even more than a year for govt to approve the names of judges,' Oka said. The retired justice said, 'Once the Supreme Court collegium resolution is on the website, imagine the mindset of that person. He cannot get work as he feels he's going to become a judge, but he must wait nine months or even a year or more. Does this not affect the independence of the judiciary?' Oka said, 'Therefore, the scenario today is that of chief justices saying they find it difficult to persuade bright lawyers to accept judgeship because of the practical difficulties they face due to the uncertainty.' by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025 Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo He was delivering the first lecture under the annual lecture series in memory of the late Justice H R Khanna of the Supreme Court, organised by the Goa High Court Bar Association. Oka said it is up to the legal fraternity to ensure that the independence of the judiciary remains intact, and unless the judiciary is independent, fundamental rights and democracy will not survive. While the right to hold protests was curbed during the Emergency, the tendency continues even today, Oka said. 'I came across a case as the Chief Justice of the Karnataka high court in 2020 or 2021 where Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was invoked when somebody wanted to protest against the CAA,' Oka said. 'In those days, rulers relied upon Emergency powers, but the tendency continues and I had to set aside the order that prohibited an agitation against the CAA.' Once a lawyer takes an oath as a judge, he or she should never think about future prospects, he said, and not think about the consequences of a judgment they are going to deliver. Bold and fearless judges like the late Justice Khanna, who was fiercely independent, may not get high posts but will get great satisfaction in abiding by the oath, Oka said. Judges like Khanna and other fearless judges who sacrificed a lot but did not reach the pinnacle or the Supreme Court will nevertheless be remembered forever, he said. On the other hand, he said, there are judges who have reached high positions but have already been forgotten.


The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
Socialism, secularism are the spirit of the Constitution
India's Constitution is not merely a legal document. It is the embodiment of the ideals and the aspirations of a nation that was forged in the crucible of an anti-colonial struggle. Among its most fundamental principles are socialism and secularism, values that are not confined to the Preamble alone but which are woven throughout its text, reflected in the Directive Principles of State Policy, in the Fundamental Rights, and in its very structure. Recent calls by the leadership of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) leadership to remove the words socialism and secularism from the Preamble are not just an attack on semantics but is also a direct assault on the foundational vision of the Indian republic itself. The RSS General Secretary made this call recently under the garb of criticising the Emergency, which happened 50 years ago, as the words socialism and secularism were added in the Preamble under the Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976 during the Emergency. It is a deceitful move by the RSS to invoke the Emergency in order to discredit these principles, especially when it colluded with the Indira Gandhi government during that time for its own survival. To use that event in history to now undermine the Constitution reflects the RSS's hypocrisy and opportunism. Reflected in the Preamble and beyond Socialism, in the Indian Constitution, is a commitment to social and economic justice, the eradication of inequality, and the creation of a welfare state. The Preamble promises 'Justice, social, economic and political' to all citizens, and seeks 'Equality of status and of opportunity'. It underlines the fact that even before the 42nd Amendment, the spirit of socialism was always present in our Constitution. There were significant efforts in the Indian Constitution to increase the freedoms of citizens and to reduce the inequalities prevalent in society. The Fundamental Rights were major steps in that direction. Article 14 guarantees equality before law. Article 15 prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. Article 16 ensures equality of opportunity in matters of public employment. These rights, read together with the Preamble and Directive Principles, enshrine a vision of a society free from exploitation, where the dignity of every individual is upheld. The Directive Principles of State Policy have the clearest articulation of the socialist vision, in the Indian Constitution. Articles 38 and 39 clearly lay it out, and is further explained in Articles 41, 42 and 43. These provisions are not just aspirational; they have guided landmark legislation and judicial interpretation in India. Secularism in the Indian Constitution is not mere religious neutrality but the positive assurance that the state will treat all religions equally, protect the rights of minorities, and ensure that no citizen suffers discrimination on the basis of faith. The original text of the Preamble, even before the addition of the word secular in 1976, had already promised 'Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship' and 'Fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual…'. Under Fundamental Rights, Articles 25 to 28 provide the Right to Freedom of Religion and further underscore the secular nature of the Indian Republic. Articles 29 and 30, on Cultural and Educational Rights, too reiterate this. These articles ensure that the state neither identifies with nor privileges any religion, and that every citizen, regardless of faith, enjoys equal rights and protections. Even the Supreme Court of India has repeatedly affirmed that secularism is part of the Constitution's 'basic structure'. The Basic Structure Doctrine was introduced in 1973 in the Supreme Court's landmark judgment in Kesavananda Bharati. It holds that while Parliament can amend the Constitution, it cannot alter its fundamental structure, i.e., the basic structure of the Constitution is inviolable. As mentioned earlier, the 42nd Amendment which introduced the words socialism and secularism in the Preamble of the Constitution was enacted in 1976, three years after this historic verdict. Yet, the additions could be made precisely because they did not violate the basic structure of the Constitution. Inseparable from the Constitution's fabric It is a fallacy to claim that socialism and secularism in the Preamble of the Constitution are mere 'additions' or 'impositions' from the 1970s. The Objective Resolution of the Constituent Assembly, the Constituent Assembly debates themselves and the lived experience of India's glorious anti-colonial freedom struggle all testify that these values were central to the vision of the Republic's founders. The Constitution's commitment to social and economic justice, equality, and fraternity is inherently socialist. Its guarantee of religious liberty, non-discrimination and minority rights is inherently secular. Even if the words socialist and secular (the word secular was there in Article 25(2)(a) even before the 42nd Amendment) were to be removed from the Preamble, the Constitution's core philosophy, structure and provisions would remain unchanged in their essence. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar's final speech to the Constituent Assembly on November 25, 1949, offers profound insights that reinforce the argument that the notion of equality (which forms the foundation of the ideas of socialism and secularism) is embedded in the Constitution's spirit and structure. B.R. Ambedkar's words remain a guiding light against any attempt to dilute these foundational values. The real agenda has been exposed The RSS's demand to remove socialism and secularism from the Preamble of the Constitution is a calculated move to undermine the very foundations of the Indian Republic. It exposes its long-standing agenda to replace the Constitution with a veiled Manusmriti, subvert the secular democratic republic of India, and create a theocratic Hindu Rashtra. The attempt to erase socialism and secularism from the Preamble is an attempt to rewrite history, to delegitimise the legacy of India's anti-colonial freedom struggle, and to pave the way for an oppressive majoritarian state. The Constitution of India is a living document that is designed to secure justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity for all. Socialism and secularism are the pillars on which the edifice of the Indian Republic stands. To attack them is to attack the very soul of India's democracy. All those who cherish the values of the freedom struggle — a struggle that the RSS was not part of — must stand united in defence of the lofty values of the Constitution, and resist any attempt to destroy the idea of India. M.A. Baby is the General Secretary of the Communist Party of India (Marxist)


Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Poor Congress could not get an Indian name even after Independence: CM
Bhopal: CM Mohan Yadav on Thursday launched a scathing attack on the Congress while addressing a mock parliament session organised by the BJP Mahila Morcha (BJP women's wing) on the imposition of the Emergency by the erstwhile Indira Gandhi govt in 1975. He said the Congress was founded by the British who left India after Independence. And till now, Congress leaders could not find an Indian name for their party. "Do you ever think why the Congress Party has been named Congress?" he asked the gathering at the People's Auditorium. "This is such a poor party that they did not get an Indian name. How unfortunate is that? If your brothers and sisters are born, do you name them like the children of America and England? And if you have to keep a foreign name, then go there and contest the elections," Chief Minister Mohan Yadav argued. He further said, "The country got its Independence in 1947. And who founded the Congress party? The British who left India. And the Congress are still running that party. If they cannot do anything else, then at least they should change the name of the party if you must stand opposite Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Show some Indianness. But they are not willing." Apart from Chief Minister Mohan Yadav, state BJP president Hemant Khandelwal, former state party president Vishnudutt Sharma, state party organisational general secretary Hitanand Sharma, and state Mahila Morcha president Maya Narolia addressed the "Women Mock Parliament" to commemorate 50 years of Emergency. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch vàng CFDs với mức chênh lệch giá thấp nhất IC Markets Đăng ký Undo Chief Minister Mohan Yadav said that when former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi imposed Emergency in the country, she banned radio and newspapers. "Thousands of people were put in jail. In the third generation, the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi overturned the Supreme Court's decision on triple talaq by making a law and attacked the interests of Muslim sisters." CM Yadav said that when BJP patriarch Atal Bihari Vajpayee was the LOP in the Lok Sabha, he encouraged the army during the 1971 war and boosted the morale of the country. "But on the other hand, today's LOP Rahul Gandhi, who is from the fourth generation of the Nehru-Gandhi family, raises questions on our armed forces carrying out surgical strikes and air strikes against terrorists," he said. The chief minister claimed that Rahul Gandhi has tarnished the post of LOP by using words that demoralise the country's forces. Chief Minister Yadav argued that respect for women power has been the ideology and tradition of the BJP. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has given 33% reservation to women and has started many schemes for their empowerment. State BJP president Hemant Khandelwal said that Emergency was a blot on the country's forehead and this blot was imposed by Congress and Indira Gandhi to save their govt. "For personal interests, Congress repeatedly amended the Constitution made by Baba Saheb Ambedkar. Indira Gandhi was so scared by the High Court's decision on Raj Narayan Singh's election petition that she imposed Emergency on the country," Khandelwal said. "In our country run by collective leadership, Indira Gandhi glorified herself and gave the slogan 'Indira is India'. Hundreds of democracy fighters like revered Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Lal Krishna Advani, who agitated to save the Constitution, were sent to jail. Leaders who were her political opponents were jailed," the state BJP chief said. MSID:: 122232039 413 |